Replies to This Discussion

As I read it, the Illinois Department of Agriculture established the presence of foulbrood in his hives and he did not comply with the instructions to contain the disease and destroy the designated combs and frames and the infected bees and honey.

He failed several times to do this. As an experienced beekeeper he should know better.

The monsanto thing seems to be a figment of his imagination. From what I read in the most flattering portrayal in the first link (the second is a rehash of the first with extra square quotes compensated by less tentatives) he seems to have developed a theory (a hypothesis we should say) that Round-Up caused his bees to die and Colony Collapse Disorder, CCD. He says he had a queen that lived for three years and speculated on basis of this tentative correlation with sample size = 1 that this queen might have developed some resistance against - I presume the actual toxin in Round Up - glyphosate.

But it is a lot more complicated than that. CCD can possibly have many causes. And then again maybe it doesn't or at least in some substantial number of cases:

Did he rule out for example the usage of neonicotinoids in the vicinity? These toxins are very common and used in just about every product for home gardening in Europe, I am going to assume it will not be much different in the US.

Anyway if foulbrood has been found in his hives and he refused to follow the required procedures then this whole thing is moot. He should have done that and he should have done that immediately.The whole thing reads like willful ignorance. Based on what I read there, these people should probably not be allowed to be keeping bees at all.

As I read it, he has proof that his hives were not infected, and that's what this hearing is going to prove.
He wasn't in town when they made the disease accusations, which was timed by the state and enforced without due process.

The samples were tested in a lab. When they are tested positive for AFB you must accept that there is AFB in it, false positives and inconclusive results, because the infection having occurred long before it becoming apparent (from the goo of the dead larvae, full of spores) do not really occur. Over and beyond that, a responsible beekeeper should follow the precautionary principle and contain the disease, preventing it from infecting other colonies.

That typical American sensitivities about government agencies interfering in private property are hurt, I believe that. And I don't care. At that time of his inaction he formed a danger also for the private property of other beekeepers.

I don't think irresponsible people like that should be keeping bees at all.